1697 research outputs found
Sort by
Zero Trust and Advanced Persistent Threats: Who Will Win the War?
Get PDFAdvanced Persistent Threats (APTs) are state-sponsored actors who break into computer networks for political or industrial espionage. Because of the nature of cyberspace and ever-changing sophisticated attack techniques, it is challenging to prevent and detect APT attacks. 2020 United States Federal Government data breach once again showed how difficult to protect networks from targeted attacks. Among many other solutions and techniques, zero trust is a promising security architecture that might effectively prevent the intrusion attempts of APT actors. In the zero trust model, no process insider or outside the network is trusted by default. Zero trust is also called perimeterless security to indicate that it changes the focus from network devices to assets. All processes are required to verify themselves to access the resources. In this paper, we focused on APT prevention. We sought an answer to the question: could the 2020 United States Federal Government data breach have been prevented if the attacked networks used zero trust architecture? To answer this question, we used MITRE\u27s ATT&CK® framework to extract how the APT29 threat group techniques could be mitigated to prevent initial access to federal networks. Secondly, we listed basic constructs of the zero trust model using NIST Special Publication 800-207 and several other academic and industry resources. Finally, we analyzed how zero trust can prevent malicious APT activities. We found that zero trust has a strong potential of preventing APT attacks or mitigating them significantly. We also suggested that vulnerability scanning, application developer guidance, and training should not be neglected in zero trust implementations as they are not explicitly or strongly mentioned in NIST SP 800-207 and are among the mostly referred controls in academic and industry publications
Families Perceptions of Care Related to End-Of-Life Care Visits
No full textHospice care in the United States focuses on the patient and family unit, aspiring to provide high-quality end-of-life care. Support and palliation of symptoms by the hospice, allows the patient to die comfortably and with dignity with the family by their side. One problem in hospice care is whether quality data reporting shows a correlation between publicly reported quality measures and the families’ experience of care. The quality data the public sees is the Hospice Item Set (HIS) data and the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) survey data, viewable publicly on the Hospice Compare site. This quantitative study compares the quality data reporting for Avow Hospice in Naples, Florida to determine if increasing visit frequencies, the last three days of life as reported on the HIS, improves the families’ experience of care for the CAHPS global measures questions 39 and 40. Forty-five months of data is captured in this study, comparing data from deaths from April 2017 through December 2020. The study results indicate that increasing visits the last three days of life yields no improvement in the families’ experience for CAHPS survey question 39, however there is evidence that it improves CAHPS survey question 40. Compounded by the Public Health Emergency (PHE), hospices had to become creative in the types and lengths of visits and services provided to hospice patients. Based on this research conducted, the elimination of the imminent measure pair, and the inception of the new Hospice Outcomes and Patient Evaluation (HOPE) assessment tool, further research is needed to identify the correlation between increased hospice care provider visits and the perceptions of families’ experiences
Leveraging Evidence-Based Innovation to Mitigate Stratified Cancer Disparities
No full textBackground: Epidemiological evidence illustrates cancer as a leading cause of global morbidity and mortality, approaching 20 million new diagnoses annually and exhibiting one of the most complex and nonuniform burdens throughout high-income countries (HIC) and developing nations alike. Despite an ongoing “War on Cancer”, significant translational disconnects are hypothesized as impeding the diffusion of critical health innovations, resulting in low-impact implementation as well as rural and isolated America experiencing dichotomous rates of cancer survival when compared to metropolitan areas (Freeman, 2004; Gemert-Pijnen, 2011; NIH, 2007; Rodin, 2017). While parallel healthcare disciplines have successfully leveraged Rogers’ Diffusion of Innovation (DOI) towards efficacious adoption of EBI, a persistent void within radiation oncology literature was identified. A DOI theoretical framework provided means through which fundamental differences in perceptions could be identified and contextualized. Methods: The current study conducted a cross-sectional exploration of geographically stratified radiation oncology treatment planners’ perceptions as they pertained to evidence-based innovations (EBI). University IRB approval was obtained in Winter of 2021. Through the use of randomized sampling and validated DOI instrumentation, the perceptions of 165 practitioners were collected across 48 states using an electronic survey. Respondents were stratified along the USDA ERS rural-urban codification continuum (RUCC) and in accordance with historical workforce reporting. Techniques to ensure data reliability and that all statistical assumptions had been satisfied were performed prior to analysis. Final results were calculated using SAS. Results: Fundamental intra-strata differences in the perceptions of EBI were identified for the perceived characteristics (PCI) of compatibility (t(160) = 4.12, P \u3c 0.0001, d = 0.7708), relative advantage (t(161) = 3.72, P = 0.0003, d = 0.6960), visibility (t(161) = 2.99, P = 0.0032, d = 0.5453), and result demonstrability (t(161) = 2.98, P = 0.0034, d = 0.5565). Metropolitan respondents expressed strongest agreement with survey items related to relative advantage, while nonmetropolitan respondents exhibited strong agreement with survey items related to voluntariness. Innovation attributes of voluntariness, ease of use, trialability, and image did not exhibit statistically significant differences when comparing metropolitan and nonmetropolitan responses. Nearly three-quarters (72 percent) of respondents indicated the adoption of EBI into clinical practice within the past year. Conclusions: Study outcomes directly substantiate earlier assertions by the NIH Center to Reduce Cancer Health Disparities (2007) and shed new light on persistent barriers to diffusing EBI towards improving cancer survival across rural-urban strata. Intra-strata differences in the perceptions of valuable EBI may ultimately manifest as poorer rates of adoption and nascent implementation, thus failing to bridge rural-urban divides. The diffusion theoretical framework employed within this study demonstrated vast potential in analyzing fundamental perceptions of cancer care professionals, as well as validating practical mechanisms by which outcomes could be translated towards effectively leveraging critical health innovations. Future research is encouraged to not only reproduce the findings herein, but also to pursue correlational designs that examine specific innovations that may truly mitigate disparities in cancer survival
Factors Impacting Student Success in a Competency-Based Education College Course
No full textThere is increased interest in the competency-based education (CBE) learning modality, and higher education institutions (HEIs) in the United States are experiencing increased enrollment in courses and programs offered in this format (Nodine T. R., 2016). This learning modality creates an opportunity for students to progress through a course or program at a quicker pace by demonstrating competency and mastery of learning outcomes. However, it can also present unique challenges for students completing a course in this learning environment, as well as course faculty and success coaches (academic success coaching staff) working with those students. No research on the factors that influence student success within CBE has been conducted. Therefore, the purpose of this research study was to identify factors that CBE students, course faculty, and success coaches perceive to facilitate or hinder student success in completing a CBE course in college. This qualitative study consists of online surveys and in-depth, semi-structured interviews. The three major themes and associated subthemes that make up the study’s findings highlight issues related to the flexibility and structure of this learning modality, student preparedness and expectations related to completing a CBE college course, and interaction and support available in this learning modality. The findings of this study provide insight into the factors perceived to impact student success in a CBE college course. Future research is needed to better understand impacts on student success and how to create more successful learning experiences for students in this learning modality
A Theory of Brain-Based Followership
Get PDFStudies and theories of followership have tended to take a back seat to their more prominent cousin, leadership research. There does, however, seem to be considerable agreement among researchers about the integral role of the follower in co-determining organizational performance. Until relatively recently there has been little focus on the overall contriibution of the follower to organizational success. The intent of this paper is to shed new light on the current state of followership research, identify some of the critical issues that confound its findings, and to propose an alternate theoretical approach that is based in neuroscientific research. The suggested brain-based theory is base on a synthesis of the current research on followership as well as recent findings in brain science
The Effectiveness of Vaccination in Preventing the Transmission of Meningococcal B Disease on a University Campus
No full textNeisseria meningitides serogroup B, commonly referred to as Meningococcal B or Meningitis B, is a highly contagious bacterial infection primarily afflicting the college-aged population with disease contraction resulting in death or severe debilitation if not expediently diagnosed and treated. Currently, there are two vaccines, Bexsero and Trumenba, approved by the Food & Drug Administration to aid in preventing this disease; however, limited research supports the use of vaccination in stopping disease progression and/or preventing disease. The theoretical framework for this study was the social-ecological model. The purpose of this causal-comparative quantitative study was to determine the effectiveness of vaccination in preventing the transmission of Meningococcal B disease on a university campus in Massachusetts. Secondary data were extracted from the state’s Immunization Information System, the state’s Bureau of Infectious Disease and Laboratory Sciences infectious disease reporting database, and the research facility’s electronic health record software for eligible undergraduate student participants. ANOVA statistical testing in SAS was utilized for data analysis; variables for analysis included both vaccinated and unvaccinated students as independent variables and the incidence/prevalence of Meningococcal B disease on campus as the dependent variable. With a limited number of Meningococcal B disease cases on campus, this study failed to find a possible connection between vaccination and the incidence/prevalence of Meningococcal B disease on a university campus in Massachusetts. The results of this study will be used to encourage further research to gauge the true effectiveness of vaccination in contributing to Meningococcal B disease prevention
FUSE Annual Report 2022
Get PDFLearn about FUSE\u27s performance during the August, 2021 - July, 2022 Academic Year in the Franklin University Library\u27s annual report
Aristotle’s Twofold Conception of Time
Get PDFWhy does Aristotle say that there is no time without change? Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 101, 359-367.Ursula Coope\u27s view is that since Aristotle defines time as a kind of number of change with respect to the before and after, it is a universal order within which all changes are related to each other (Coope, U. 2005. Time for Aristotle: Physics IV.10-14. Oxford: Oxford University Press.). Derivatively, this slanted concern with what is the relation between time and change is problematic, for as Brittany A. Gentry recently suggests, an interpretation of presentism, for example, allows one to endorse the view that time is nothing more than the measure of change (Gentry, B.A. 2021. Measuring the present: What is the duration of \u27now\u27